Written ‘expert’ evidence that is not quite the whole truth & nothing but the truth: What effect on Criminal Justice?

Written ‘expert’ evidence that is not quite the whole truth & nothing but the truth: What effect on Criminal Justice?

Forthcoming Summer 2016:

On the 27th January 2016, the Forensic Regulator (UK) released a Review of the Scottish Police Authority (at that time called the SPSA) forensic science laboratory’s performance in the case of Her Majesty’s Advocate v Ross Monaghan (unreported). The case was a murder prosecution in relation to the death by shooting of Kevin Carroll, in the carpark of a supermarket in Glasgow, in 2010. The trial resulted in Mr Monaghan being acquitted and a voir dire in the course of the trial resulted in expert evidence about Firearms Discharge Residue being ruled inadmissible.

This paper compares the findings of the Court with the findings, and in particular the conclusions, of the Forensic Regulator. It highlights several important areas of serious causes for concern by legal practitioners and persons accused of crimes, including where the written report of an expert witness does not provide an accurate statement of the evidence. The implications of this on plea bargaining, trial practise, and criminal justice, are explored. 

With A. Jamieson.